Saturday, May 23, 2015

One of the reasons I only reluctantly engage in any online EU debate is because I have
been a Eurosceptic all my life and I have read every cliché, every
hackneyed mantra, every block capital rant, every slimy press release
and every glossy brochure. I am so utterly sick of the sight of it I
would be happy to leave the EU purely on the basis of never having to
see such drivel again, regardless of the more delicate matters therein.

Further to this, if there is one thing more tiresome than your opponent
distorting the truth, it's watching your own side engaging in the debate
and getting it wrong. So single-minded are they in their ignorance that
they interpret any criticism of their arguments as an attack from a
"Lib/Lab/Con Europhile Gramscian Marxist traitor" (whatever that means).
This is particularly evident among the Ukip fraternity. It's boring,
it's lame, and more to the point, it is not going to win us an EU
referendum. The aggressive and bullying posturing of "cyber-nats" has
tainted the Scottish independence debate and it has not won anyone over.
It is that same stunted attitude that will lose us an EU referendum.

The way to win the debate is with rational, measured, realistic answers.
The outcome of the referendum will be less about why we should leave
the EU, but what will happen if we do. That is why it is important to
have a grasp on how we leave the EU. Ripping up treaties and walking
away is not a realistic proposition. Decades of political and regulatory
integration will not be undone overnight, and not even in a few years.
Anyone making the case that we can is someone who probably doesn't
understand the complexity of EU regulation or the necessity for it.
Leaving the EU does not mean we are free of international obligations in
the way we trade with the world either.

Our side needs to be prepared and it needs to have good answers to
difficult questions. This is why I have so relentlessly attacked Ukip
which is still failing to answer the more nuanced questions with
anything other than flimsy conjecture. Ukippers say it doesn't matter
but it very much does.

The way the pro-EU camp will fight this is with scaremongering about
trade and jobs. To engage in top-trumps arguments on trade and jobs is
to immediately fall into the trap because it plays along with the lie
that the EU is a trade organisation. It isn't.

From the beginning the EU has been a federalist, supranationalist
project. "Ever closer union" is written into the DNA of the EU and the
final destination is an EU superstate, with a flag, an anthem and army,
complete with a president and foreign policy capable of starting wars of
their own. Were the wording of the referendum entirely honest the
question would be "Do wish to abolish Britain as a nation to become part
of a United States of Europe?" It is fundamentally a question of who
governs us and it's about democracy.

The scaremongers will repeat the old mantra of three million jobs
depending on the EU. It cannot be said too often that those jobs depend
on the single market, not the EU - and the EU is not the single market.
It is entirely possible to be independent of the EU and still trade with
the EU and Europe. They will bleat about us not having a seat at the
top table, failing to recognise the EU is no longer the top table (if
ever it was). Most regulation now originates at the international level,
and if we leave the EU we get more influence since the EU presently
negotiates on our behalf.

The warnings of economic disaster also do not stand up. For sure, there
would be a major economic disaster were we to suddenly rip up the law
that enacts the EU, but that is why we must not fall for this straw man
and be able to point to a workable exit scenario that covers all the
bases. The lack of such will be the Achilles heel of the exit campaign.

We have to recognise that leaving the EU is a long term process, not an
event, and whichever solution is advocated it must be one that maintains
access to the single market. That is the only scenario that will not
scare the horses enough for us to win the referendum. The Ukip notion
that we will suddenly switch over to trading with the rest of the world
is not a serious argument, not least because we are always going to
trade more with our neighbours, and as an argument, any half way
informed Europhile will drive a horse and cart through it. And rightly
so.

Our side needs to be very careful not to overstate the advantages to
leaving because it will not lead to a miracle recovery or a bright new
dawn and few (apart of from the Ukip obsessives) will believe it. I
certainly don't. Even outside of the EU we are a long way from real
democracy, and anything the EU can do to us we are perfectly capable of
doing to ourselves.

In the short to medium term leaving the EU will not mean we miraculously
regain control of our borders nor will be be junking vast tranches of
regulation or abolishing VAT. This pie in the sky stuff isn't going to
happen. Nothing in policy and politics happens at the stroke of a pen
and not all of our deep rooted problems can be blamed on the EU.
Pretending otherwise is not a credible argument.

If we are going to win we must be reasonable, pragmatic and ready to
respond with watertight arguments. The coming debate will see the pro-EU
side enlisting big business to warn against "uncertainly" with grave
consequences for pulling out. This is where the "Flexcit"
plan comes into play as an off-the-shelf solution, seeing us join the
EEA & EFTA. This means the day after we leave the EU, nothing
whatsoever changes as far as industry is concerned, but we then have the
power to start reasserting our sovereignty.

We might prefer more drastic and faster methods, but business and the
public will need reassurances to vote the right way and these are the
compromises we will have to make if we want to win. Leaving the EU is
like turning a supertanker and we will have to do it in stages.

This does mean we will still have open borders, but we are then free to
take the necessary domestic measures to reduce the pull factor for
immigrants, while negotiating with the countries of origin to take
measures in preventing the flow. Closing our borders in not a realistic
option and nor would we want to. There are more nuanced and creative
solutions.

Essentially the "little-Englander" Ukip approach to the debate (of
pulling up the drawbridge and turning us into an island fortress) is not
a vision we can sell. It has limited appeal and so do the sorts of
people who push that line. They tend to be the "Mr Angry" ilk who are
absolutely poisonous to speak with and horribly tiresome - the very
reason I can't bring myself to join Ukip.

We can only win the debate using skillfully crafted arguments. Mantras
and conjecture is insufficient. We must show the opposition and the
world that we still believe in international co-operation and freedom of
trade and movement, and that we have better solutions to our problems
than the EU.

Moreover, we must have broader ambitions than simply leaving the EU.
Leaving the EU is not the end of the fight. Leaving the EU is only a
milestone on the road to democracy, and just because we have shift the
establishment from Brussels back to London it does not mean we have any
greater control over our affairs. So we will need bigger ideas than the
wholly negative premise of leaving the EU and sticking twos up to
Europe.

That is why The Harrogate Agenda, a total revolution in the structure of UK governance, has been included in the Flexcit plan,
not only as a deal sweetener, but also as a destination where
government serves our interests and not those of an ever distant elite.
It is a positive vision that makes leaving the EU more than a dull
technical procedure and something that might inspire a movement that
lives beyond the referendum campaign. If we leave the running of the
campaign to the likes of the IEA and the Tory think-tank fraternity,
they will waste the cash, lose the referendum and let the movement fall
flat, as every campaign they have ever managed has.

In that respect, those who are serious about winning this referendum
will be fighting on three fronts. We will have to deal with the
underhanded lies of the pro-EU camp, the brain-capsizing ineptitude of
the Ukip, and the selfish, self-absorbed right-wing think tank grandees
who are neither use nor ornament. We can only win this if Eurosceptics
up their game and start doing their homework - and most of all, do not
allow the campaign to be hijacked by Westminster careerist campaigners
who get paid either way. I don't know about you, but I would like to
win.

We're only a few days into the EU referendum campaign for real but we're
proving in spades the value of having the superior intellectual capital
and why you need your ducks in a row before you go into the fight.
Something Ukip never learned which is why they messed up their election
campaign.

We've won every debate we entered on Twitter this week. Just a
pity we're the only operation in the game. The kippers are floundering
because they've done nothing but grunt about immigration
for two years so they're no use at all. If we had the public money the
europhile campaign does, us sceptics would have this referendum in the
bag.

The main reason we'll lose is because the media will use the
eurosceptic B team as their go to guys - Carswell, Farage and Hannan.
Thus far, the BBC haven't approached EUreferendum.com. Only the most
influential and longest running eurosceptic blog there is. We do have our victories though.

Thursday, May 21, 2015

We don't tell you how to build aircraft so don't tell us how to run our country.

The EU is not the single market so the functioning of Airbus is not in
any way affected by the UK leaving the EU. Most of the rules of the
single market are made by global bodies. This you know full well. The
same is true of the regulations with which you must comply.

To say you would reconsider investment in the UK in the event of Britain
leaving the European Union ignores the fact that you already have, some
time ago - not least by ending 100 years of aviation at Filton by
closing the runway. This does not suggest to me a long term commitment
to the UK.

Moreover, the repair jobs based at Bristol have been gradually
outsourced to India over the last few years so please don't pretend you
care about British jobs. We know that first and foremost you are a
French company and you have been gradually pulling out for years,
placing all the best jobs in Toulouse.

If it's labour costs that bother you, you should be glad we're leaving the EU. As to jobs, don't forget those jobs are heavily subsidised with OUR money. We CAN take our money elsewhere.

Meanwhile, our order for the A400M is worth less to us than the
maintenance contracts for the C130. We can survive without it. And while
we're on that subject, rather than pontificating on how we should run
our democracy, how about you concentrate on making the A400M not fall
out of the sky and killing all the crew - especially since our RAF men and women will
be serving on them?

Many firmly eurosceptic Tories think that if we quit the EU, we'll lose Scotland from the Union. This they tell me is why they will vote to stay in the EU.

I take the view that an independent Scotland would not be intolerable if
we leave the EU. By now most eurosceptics appear to be settled on Efta as a solution or an interim negotiating platform, which retains our access to the single market. This makes sense. From the likes of Airbus and Deutsche Bank we've seen the usual hyperventilation about uncertainty, but retention of the single market cuts through all that. Brexit makes very little difference to business as usual.

The only way the pro-EU forces can then win is to continue their deception that the EU is the single market. This is their only ace. We have two years with which to educate the public that much of the rules that govern the single market come from global bodies from the WTO to UNECE. As an independent nation we can influence the rules before they get anywhere near the EU. And so could Scotland.

Efta is an intergovernmental alliance rather than a
supranational project, so Scotland would massively benefit if it did leave the Union. For starters it could have many of the benefits that Iceland and Norway enjoys and also a seat
at the NAFO and other bodies in the Nordic trade circle. Without such influence over things like Scottish fishing waters, there is very little point in leaving the Union but staying in the EU.

As an independent nation. Scotland would
then have a voice and would probably have more to say at the top table
on some issues than we do. It has a much stronger voice as a nation within a community of nations than a single bloc like the EU. Giving Scotland all the adult responsibilities that come with independence means reality will soon dampen some of the SNP's more, shall we say, ambitious ideas. It is likely the SNP would be thrown out of office post independence anyway.

Nothing will ever change the fact that
Scotland is intimately intertwined with England and Wales so we have
little to fear. Even as an independent state, London can still hold sway with Edinburgh.
Without London, Scotland would be a weak voice in the EU and there is little to be said for Scotland rejoining if it has all the advantages of Efta. It's a gamble but as a partner nation in Efta with the remainder of the UK, we have a chance at shaping the world in ways we can't while the EU negotiates on our behalf. So what we should be saying to Scotland is give us our freedom from the
EU and we'll give you yours. If then Scotland wishes to remain part of the Union and see where our independent future takes us, I'm good with that too.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

To stand any chance in the referendum that is coming, the Out campaign should calmly distance itself from that rag-tag of Ukip MEPs,
and the warring Ukip leadership, and hope that the party’s 3.8 million
voters turn up regardless. Moderate voices from business and beyond
should be deployed urgently who can counter the wave of pro-EU
propaganda about to be unleashed on middle-ground voters. If that cannot
be done, if the Eurosceptic cause cannot be decontaminated, then the
Out campaign should prepare to get thrashed.

Everyone sees it but Farage. Failure seems inevitable now Farage has gone full Galloway. I've spent
months trying to reach these people but we cannot do business with
"Liblabcon/EUSSR" headbangers. We've tried. Their cult comes first.

The Kipper line is that there will be no referendum and if there is,
they'll lose it, so they carry on marching behind Farage in the rather
optimistic delusion they'll eventually take power. As far as they're
concerned the referendum will be "rigged" so we can't possibly win it,
so in the kipper mind there is no fault attached to losing it - even if
they're utterly repellent.

Up to now I've never seen round 1 as
winnable, just an opportunity to put the issue front and centre and
build up an alliance of experienced and knowledgeable campaigners who
can be put to use in any future treaty referendum. That's when we'll see
a huge swing against the EU, but that can only happen if we lose this
referendum well. Farage seems absolutely determined it should be a
wipe-out and lose as badly as possible. I've said it before and I'll say
it again - Ukip is the most malevolent force in British politics.

The last twenty four hours have proven to me that the Cult of Farage is as strong as ever. The Kippers are certain that their man is a referendum winner and they will back him all the way. So we'll have Farage front and centre on all the BBC shows, insulting the audience, making speeches up on the spot, getting the arguments wrong and mouthing off about HIV infected foreigners. He will turn the referendum into a left vs right debate and he will lose as he alienates just about every marginal voters we need to win.

Farage has even become convinced of his own infallibility claiming that "You’ve got a situation where a party leader has more support than he’s ever had by a monster margin. There was a leadership election four months ago, and it was uncontested. My support is stronger now than it was then”.

He has a mandate for sure, but a mandate from kippers. ie not 87% of the electorate.

In an article for The Sunday Times, Godfrey Bloom — the former Ukip MEP said the “out” campaign would lose the referendum if Farage was at the helm because he was not popular enough outside his own party. Douglas Carswell expressed concern about claims that Farage would now be “more autocratic” and face down his internal critics. He said that Farage's leadership could hurt Eurosceptic hopes. That's nothing we've not been saying for over a year. Farage's closest friends, colleagues and enemies are all telling him the same thing. If this isn't a bunker mentality I don't know what is. It has a ring of Downfall to it. Farage is becoming the new George Galloway.

We can only hope he jumps the shark soon and goes into self-destruct because if that man is the Brexit spokesman on Question Time then it's game over, for real. We only have a fighting chance if Ukip does not own the campaign. If Farage does not go, then Carswell will have to step up to the plate and hurt the party by quitting. If he believes in the importance of this referendum he will have to fall on his sword.

Kippers have been hammering the message all day that Ukip got 4m votes and that we are only be having a referendum because of Nigel Farage. Now they are determined to go down with the captain. Twenty years it took to build the party to what it is, to give us a shot at leaving the EU - but in the final analysis, Nigel Farage will be the man who blows it for Britain. Europhiles must be loving every minute of this.

Friday, May 15, 2015

Watching BBC Question Time, we get the distinct impression that Farage
will help Ukip limp along until September while it gets its act together
for some kind of leadership contest, in which Farage will probably let
the other contenders make fools of themselves and resume his role, given
that the gang of clowns he appointed to senior roles could not possibly
replace him. That was always a possibility.

One thing we saw was Farage having a pretty easy ride of it. The thing
is, Farage is now the useful idiot the establishment needs. He will make
the worst possible case for Brexit, using decades old arguments, which
are now beyond relevance, dragging immigration into the debate - which
is what lost winnable seats for Ukip in the general election.

He trots out the same old baloney about a European army and and "taking
back control of our borders", and it's precisely the sort of easy hit
arguments the europhiles are prepared to face down, and Farage will walk
right into it.

In many respects, the political establishment couldn't ask for a better
opponent. He has been anointed by the BBC as the official spokesman for
the Brexit campaign even though he has precisely no mandate to do that.
For those eurosceptics like me who want this to be about bigger issues
of governance, democracy, sovereignty and human rights reform, Farage is
the very worst possible spokesman.

Never will you hear it said that free movement of people and trade is
the benefit of the single market and the EEA, not the EU. Nobody will
even make the distinction. Farage won't make this case because he's
barely aware of the distinction even as an MEP. As it happens the
majority of British MPs and MEP's don't know the difference.

This does raise the question of whether anyone in Ukip would be any
better and the answer is categorically not (since they're all
mouth-breathing losers), but in any case, the squabbling will continue
for sometime within Ukip and that will sadly equate Brexit with Ukip -
and will show just how much the campaign is in disarray. When the only
other "assets" we have are the likes of Matthew Elliott, Dan Hannan,
Bill Cash, John Redwood, Dominic Cummings and Business For Britain, the chances of winning look remote.

None of them will appreciate that the debate has been framed between the
status quo and the narrow little Englander vision and they will only
speak within those narrow parameters, with perhaps only Hannan preaching
a more liberal view but in essence getting all the arguments wrong
because he's a shallow individual and impenetrably thick.

One thing is clear, we are not going to get an honest debate about the
EU, or even about what the EU is from either side, and ignorance will be
considered a virtue. You might well ask why I'm even bothering. Given
how bleak it looks today, I really don't know. I guess I'm just not one
for going down without a fight, even if my allies are my enemies.